After newsroom shooting, take broader approach on firearm violence | Randy Schultz

After newsroom shooting, take broader approach on firearm violence | Randy Schultz

If you believe that America should accept regular mass killings as a price of the Second Amendment, turn the page or swipe on. But if you believe that firearm violence shames this country and that our democracy could prevent needless tragedies and respect the Constitution, hear me out on this Independence Day. Like many South Florida journalists of a certain age, I knew Rob Hiaasen. He and four colleagues at The Annapolis (Md.) Capital Gazette were murdered last week. Everything you have read about Rob Hiaasen is true. He was talented, funny and kind. Put him in any newsroom, and the newsroom got better. His killing is tragic. But so are all of the other killings from all the other shootings. Sandy Hook. Pulse. Sutherland Springs. Las Vegas. Marjory Stoneman Douglas. Santa Fe. Charleston. Virginia Tech. Red Lake. San Bernardino. Umpqua Community College. The names toll like church bells. Each took the lives of people like Rob Hiaasen. After each one, there were tears, rage and calls for Congress to act. Nothing. Ever. Happened. Last week, a TV talking head opined that the Annapolis massacre might be problematic for gun control advocates. The weapon was ordinary – a shotgun, not the sort of military-style weapon used in Parkland and Las Vegas. What legislation, he wondered, could arise? Such an argument misses the point. Even the most comprehensive, well-designed firearms bill wouldn’t stop every mass shooting. Specifics also draw immediate opposition from the National Rifle Association and like-minded lawmakers. Washington […]

Leave a Reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.